Wondering on Wednesday 1/15/25

Ready... Set... Wonder!

The Once and Future President (OAFP) wants to make our government smaller. And that's just one reason why I can't help wondering whether we really need a new External Revenue Service to collect tariffs from foreign countries. Separate from the fact that tariffs aren't paid by foreign governments, they're paid by the importers of goods from foreign countries, who typically will pass them on to customers, we already have the good folks at Customs and Border Protection who are responsible for collecting money from foreign governments. Why do we need another team to do the same thing?

You might wonder, as I did, whether the creation of the new department is a suggestion that they're not doing a good job. That doesn't appear to be the case. Rather, the ERS is a way to help us all - even the donor class! Take a look at these comments from MAGAist Steve Bannon, speaking with Dasha Burns of Politico.

Tariffs paid for everything up until the early 20th century. But you wouldn't just look at tariffs, you look at everything about how you can charge fees essentially, whether that's on investment, whether that's on other things of access to this country. America's behind the golden door, OK? And this market is the most robust, lucrative market in the world, and we shouldn't just let people have access, we shouldn't let foreigners have access to this market and to the American people and American citizens for free.

And he said, the ERS, which he envisions fitting under the Treasury Department,  

should eventually take the “burden off people on Internal Revenue Services — no reason the American people, American corporations, even the donor class has to pay for everything.” (emphasis added)

I have to wonder how many Americans woke up this morning worried about the donor class?  

We know who they are, right? The tech billionaires, media billionaires, pharma billionaires, think tank billionaires, and so on. My first thought? Most of us regular folks are pretty sick of hearing about - and from - 'the donor class.' And it seems no one's more sick of one of them -Elon Musk, the First Buddy - than Bannon himself. 

What could be going wrong between these two, you're wondering? Bannon and other MAGA 'originalists' have been publicly bickering with Musk over the coveted H1-B visas, which give foreigners up to six years to work in the US in mostly high-paying jobs that could go to Americans, thinking that supporting those visas goes against the MAGA goal of reducing all immigration, and against America First principles.

Speaking with an Italian newspaper, Bannon proclaimed

I will get Elon Musk kicked out by the time (Trump's) inaugurated. He won’t have a blue pass with full access to the White House. He’ll be like everyone else.

He’s a truly evil person. Stopping him has become a personal issue for me. Before, since he’s put in so much money, I was prepared to tolerate it. Not anymore.

With only a handful of days til the inauguration, is anyone else wondering who'll be the last man standing? I'm guessing it's Musk, with whom the OAFP has sided on the visa issue, but we'll see... that 'co-president' stuff will get to Trump sooner than later, I think.

Sticking with the monied people a bit longer, Robert F. Kennedy Jr., Trump's nominee to lead the Department of Health and Human Services, has submitted revised financial disclosure documents. It seems he was unaware that, when asked to state his income, the correct number to submit is the gross amount, not the net amount. And, I think he's also learned that any positive gross amount would be greater than zero. 

Now, you may be wondering why this matters. After all, there are many concerns with RFK's nomination and his positions on a whole host of issues, from the healthiest way to travel with and dispose of dead animals, to whether having part of his brain eaten by a worm is still detrimental to his mental function, or if it was only an issue during a divorce proceeding, to his wide-ranging controversial comments on vaccines and fluoridated water, to whether he would have been chosen by Trump at all if he weren't a Kennedy and a former Democrat, to why his family is so adamantly against him getting any government job... 

But here's the thing I'm wondering: now that we know he not only didn't work for free, as he has stated in interviews, but he was paid a whole lotta money from his anti-vax stuff, has anyone checked his tax returns? Did he report gross income then, or net? 

Speaking of health and stuff, the FDA today banned red dye 3 from food and beverages by January 2027, and from the medications we ingest by January 2028, due to its cancer risk. It's important to note that it was removed from cosmetics over thirty years ago. Think about that for a minute: we haven't been able to put it on our faces for almost half my lifetime, but we can continue eating, drinking, and ingesting it for at least another two years? I can't help wondering the logic of all of that, and I also have to wonder why Big Pharma gets a whole year longer than the food industry to protect us. 

And news is officially breaking today that there's a ceasefire deal between Hamas and Israel, which if all goes well should get at least some of the American hostages released soon. President Biden noted in his remarks that members of the OAFP's administration were engaged in the talks that led to the agreement, which is what would normally be expected in a well-functioning government in transition between administrations. I wonder, as we wait for word of Israel's formal acceptance, if this will be the deal that finally brings this nightmare to an end. 

There was no wondering at all on whether the OAFP would take credit for the deal; of course, he did. Similarly, I didn't wonder for a second whether the reporters covering the White House would throw a 'credit' question into the mix; of course, they did. Why? Because they simply can't help making fools of themselves at times like this. 

And they wonder why people don't trust them. 

There's always more to wonder about than I can ever fit in a single post... drop a comment if there's something on your mind.

TGIF 7/22/22

Let's do an all good-week list today - you up for that?

Here are just a few of the notables who made this a good week, in my opinion.

The jury in Steve Bannon's contempt of Congress trial. 

They took about two hours to reach a verdict and it was the right one.

Steve Bannon, ex-White House strategist and adviser to former President Donald Trump, was found guilty by a jury Friday of criminal contempt of Congress for refusing to appear before the House select committee investigating the Jan. 6, 2021, assault on the U.S. Capitol. 

Bannon was found guilty of two counts of criminal contempt — one for refusing to appear for a deposition before the panel and the other for refusing to produce requested documents. Each count carries a minimum potential sentence of 30 days and a maximum of one year in jail, as well as a fine of $100 to $1,000.

Naturally, he plans on appealing, but I don't care. I'm going to relish his conviction for as long as I can.

The tech team for the January 6th Committee. 

Last night's hearing was very well put together, and the video clips that were shared were carefully chosen and fit the moment perfectly. Among the highlights: Trump's Rose Garden message on the sixth, and the taping of his message on the seventh; the matching up of video from the Capitol and other testimony from the same time period, and the clips from Fox News and Fox personalities. And yes, the Josh Hawley clips - the fist pump, and the running clips, in full speed and slow motion, too. 

Mallory Nees (@The_Mal_Gallery on Twitter), who was the creative user behind several Josh Hawley running-to-music clips. 

Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.) may have broken a Guinness World Record on Thursday — if there’s one for guest starring in the most movies and music videos in a single night...

But the footage of Hawley was all the same: two clips that aired in prime time during the most recent hearing of the House committee investigating the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the U.S. Capitol. Both showed Hawley running from rioters as they poured into the building, according to the committee.

Rep. Liz Cheney, vice chair of the January 6th Committee. 

Her closing remarks at the end of last night's hearing? I don't think I'd change a single word. There were many quotable parts, certainly; here are a couple of the most meaningful. 

Here is the worst part. Donald Trump knows that millions of Americans who supported him would stand up and defend our nation were it threatened. They would put their lives and their freedom at stake to protect her. And he is preying on their patriotism. He is preying on their sense of justice. And on January 6th, Donald Trump turned their love of country into a weapon against our Capitol and our Constitution. 

And, perhaps the most important of all: the Thatcher quote. 

This room is full of history, and we on this Committee know we have a solemn obligation not to idly squander what so many Americans have fought and died for. Ronald Reagan’s great ally, Margaret Thatcher, said this: “Let it never be said that the dedication of those who love freedom is less than the determination of those who would destroy it.”  

The many Republicans who have testified including the two we met last night.

Among the Rs testifying in person? 

• State officials from Georgia, Pennsylvania, and Arizona. 
• A retired, highly respected conservative judge. 
• Multiple lawyers. 
• Former staffers for Trump and Mike Pence. 
• A disillusioned Capitol rioter.
• A former spokesperson for the Oath Keepers.

And, from taped testimony or news reports?

• The contemptuous Steve Bannon. 
• More lawyers, more staffers.
• Members of Trump's family.
• The House Minority Leader.
• The Senate Minority Leader.

The case against Trump is being shared by a mostly-Democratic committee, but it's being made by the Republicans. Nothing here is meant to relieve them of their complicity or their acquiescence. And, certainly, nothing forgives them for quickly dropping their facades, their anger or frustration, and traipsing off to Mar-A-Lago to kiss the ring of the man they all fear.

But without the Republicans - Cheney, and Rep. Adam Kinzinger, of course - and all who we've heard from, we wouldn't know what we know. 

TGIF, everyone.

Happy 50th Anniversary, Watergate

Today is the 50th anniversary of Watergate, the scandal that led to the resignation of President Richard Nixon. 

And I can't help drawing comparisons between that crisis and the one in which our most recent former president finds himself knee deep.

 For example, 

• Richard Nixon had a CREEP - the Committee for the Re-Election of the President; Donald Trump is a creep. 

• Nixon had criminals acting on his behalf; Trump had hundreds of criminals acting on his behalf.

• Nixon's scandal came to light with a break-in at the Watergate Hotel, a building in DC; Trump's came to light with the break-in at the US Capitol, a building in DC. 

• The Watergate scandal had Deep Throat, the long-anonymous source who fed reporters information they published in real time; the Trump scandal has deep voices: the dozens of reporters and former staffers who have written about his administration. 

• Nixon had the Saturday Night Massacre, in which DOJ folks quit so they wouldn't have to fire the special prosecutor investigating the scandal; Trump conspired to fire DOJ staff, and had a legion of people threaten to quit. 

• Nixon's secretary, Rosemary Woods, destroyed White House documents; Donald Trump has allegedly destroyed White House documents. 

• Nixon had the 'plumbers'; Trump was full of crap with his ideas of a stolen election.

• Nixon was overwhelmingly re-elected after the scandal; Trump continues to maintain that he overwhelmingly won an election he overwhelmingly lost. 

• Gerald Ford declared "our long national nightmare" to be over when Nixon resigned; Mike Pence prevented a constitutional crisis when he refused to follow Trump's directive that he not certify the election. 

• Nixon dealt with shady characters in support of his winning re-election effort; Trump had Rudy Giuliani, Steven Bannon, and countless others helping him try to steal back an election he lost. 

• It took a long time for Republicans to turn against Nixon; it's taking Republicans a long time to turn against Trump.

• Gerald Ford pardoned Nixon; Trump pardoned just about everyone.

• Richard Nixon famously said he was not a crook; Donald Trump said "No way we lost this election!"

Let's all raise a glass to the Republican who had the good sense to quit, shall we? 

Wondering on Wednesday 3/30/22

Ready... Set... Wonder!

Let's dive into the wonderment, shall we? 

Right off the bat, I have to wonder why Rep. Madison Cawthorn (R- I Lied About Why I Didn't Get In To The US Naval Academy But They Elected Me Anyway) would actually think anyone in DC political circles wanted him to attend their orgies? I mean, seriously, he's among the most obnoxious people I've never had the pleasure of meeting. And, frankly, the words 'pleasure' and 'Madison Cawthorn' go together about as well as 'delicious' and 'bird poop.'

And I wonder, who's going to get to him first: Rep. Kevin McCarthy (R-Mar-a-Lago's Tool Shed), or the folks who invited him to the orgies? Or, maybe it's going to be the other folks he knows, the politicians who do all that coke?

I also wonder if McCarthy or anyone else is going to require him to name names - otherwise, how will the Rs know who to put on key committees when they regain the majority in November?

The other day I gave US Attorney General Merrick Garland the We May Never Find the Poop Under this Snowpile award for moving oh-so-slowly in deciding whether to do anything any time soon. About anything. The House January 6th Committee asked for contempt of Congress charges against Mark 'One Man's Rusty Trailer is Another Man's Castle' Meadows. To his credit, Garland's folks did charge Steve 'Does Hanging Out On This Chinese Yacht Make My Podcast Sound Stupid?' Bannon, but still no word on Meadows. 

With former Trump administration goofballs Dan Scavino and Peter Navarro now facing a vote by the full House to refer their contempt charges to DOJ, it's past time for Garland to act on the Meadows referral, or explain why he won't act.  And the only wondering here is this: How long will it take Garland to decide whether he'll decide to make a decision?

Former president Donald Trump's White House call logs apparently have a bigly gap on January 6th. How bigly, you're wondering? Here's what CBS News is reporting.

The lack of an official White House notation of any calls placed to or by Trump for 457 minutes — from 11:17 a.m. to 6:54 p.m. — on Jan. 6, 2021 means there is no record of the calls made by Trump as his supporters descended on the U.S. Capitol, battled overwhelmed police and forcibly entered the building, prompting lawmakers and Vice President Mike Pence to flee for safety.

In case you wondered, as I did, it would take nearly 25 separate Rosemary Woods yoga poses, demonstrated in this AP photo, to create a chasm that big. And I can't believe he didn't take or receive a single call during that time - especially since we know he talked with several members of Congress, by their own admission.

Sticking with the former president, I'm sure you're all familiar his enthusiastic endorsements of MAGAesque candidates - including Madison Cawthorn, it turns out. Trump also endorsed Rep. Mo 'I Tried to Stop the Steal' Brooks, who's in the hunt for the open Alabama Senate seat. After getting Trump's support, Brooks started talking about looking ahead to 2022 and 2024 - he 'went woke' according to Trump, who pulled his endorsement last week. 

Now, what makes this all so very wonderful and interesting? Brooks pulled no punches in responding to the lost endorsement. After blaming Trump for going along with Mitch McConnell - unlikely, at best - he said

President Trump asked me to rescind the 2020 elections, immediately remove Joe Biden from the White House, immediately put President Trump back in the White House, and hold a new special election for the presidency. As a lawyer, I've repeatedly advised President Trump that January 6 was the final election contest verdict and neither the U.S. Constitution nor the U.S. Code permit what President Trump asks. Period."

I don't wonder for a second whether Trump did what Brooks says he did; at the same time, I don't doubt for a second that Brooks would say just about anything to try and stay in the game.

What's got you wondering tonight?

Wondering on Wednesday 6/30/21

Ready... Set... Wonder!

Let's dive in to today's wondering, shall we?

A Republican strategist on NPR suggested that because the Dems have only a five-vote majority in the House of Representatives as a whole, it would be grossly unfair to have a Select Committee on the 1/6 Insurrection with eight Democrats and five Republicans. And I wonder, if that consequence of the election is so unpalatable, why on earth didn't the R's jump at the chance to have an independent, 9/11-style commission? I mean, did they all get their Melania jackets from the dry cleaners at the same time?

Sticking with the House and the Select Committee, I wonder if any of the Rs that don't want an investigation have considered what Rep. Adam Kinzinger (R-IL) reportedly said - here's the meme that's making the rounds. 

I wonder, what's the argument against what he says? Either you want to know, because you think it was something other than what it appears to be, or you believe The Big Lie, and you don't want any more proof that it was supporters of Former Guy, just like it's been shown all along. Or, I guess, you're chicken and afraid of losing your job. 

Kinzinger, in a recent appearance on CNN, told Anderson Cooper, 

If people are willing, at a young age, to put their life on the line for this country, and we can't put our career on the line for the same thing, what's it worth? Why are you doing it, right? But if everybody just comes out and tells the truth, has differences of opinion or perspective, of course, we can fix this country. Short of that, we've got some trouble.

I wonder how many of his colleagues are willing to admit publicly they agree with him on that?

Speaking of 'we've got some trouble," we learned that South Dakota Gov. Kristy Noem, who might want to be Nikki Haley when she grows up, has promised to deploy her state's National Guard troops in Texas to help with border security. And, according to her spokesman, she's going to use private funds to "help alleviate the cost to South Dakota taxpayers."  The private funds are coming from a Trump-supporting used care billionaire from Tennessee, if that makes any sense at all.

And now, I'm wondering what would happen if say, Michigan's Gov. Gretchen Whitmer decided to send her state's National Guard to Texas to support asylum seekers crossing the border, and say it was Michael Bloomberg who was footing the bill. How'd that sit with everyone?

And are we going to see National Guard deployments up for bid on eBay and other auction sites, I wonder? Or Go Fund Me campaigns to send them to other states on a governor's whim? Think of all the money that could be separated from billionaires and used for defense. Or for The Wall. Anyone still have Steve Bannon on speed dial?

Speaking of Former Guy, he held a rally in Ohio the other day. and Amanda Uhle, a WaPo reporter, attended the rally out of her self-proclaimed inability to "stop probing Trump supporters, trying to understand exactly how they see the world and why they're not seeing it the way" she does. Speaking of his Ohio appearance, she wrote

This time, he was to be accompanied by all you might expect from an 88-degree evening at the Lorain County Fairgrounds — a dusty parking area, livestock stalls and creaky grandstands under the rich, dank odor of manure and surrounded by verdant fields. Air Force One would not be deployed. His lectern wouldn’t be adorned by the presidential seal. He’s not officially running for anything, even if all signs point to a bid in 2024. So, who would want to attend a Trump rally in 2021?

I almost stopped at "the rich, dank odor of manure" line - what could be more evocative of a Trump rally than that, I wondered? But I kept reading, and learned that the people who are attending now are the same people who attended his rallies before - he doesn't seem to have a new crowd, any more than he has a new message. I guess that's a good thing.

Finally, like most people, I've been following the story of the condo collapse in Florida. My heart aches for the families that have been forever changed by the tragedy, and for the community similarly forever changed

One thing I can't shake? Whether this, like so many other infrastructure collapses, was preventable, if only we had been paying attention. And paying attention from the very beginning, not just two or three years ago, or forty years later, or five or six months from now. 

Our appetite for building in coastal areas, on cliffs, in fire-prone forests, on fault lines, seems boundless, as does our appetite for ignoring potential signs of danger along the way, and for kicking the can down the road. 

We cringe, and duck, when we get an estimate on repairs, whether it's a condo or a bridge or a highway, and we don't act until the very last argument is made, literally dozens of times, and even then, half the time we make a temporary fix, as if the arguments will change when it comes time to pay the pipe. And pay we will, after a horrendous collapse, after people die, after families are forever changed by the tragedy, or even after a change in who holds the purse strings. 

And that's always the driver, right? Money up front to make growth happen; money in the middle to buy the view or the solitude or the speed to get from point A to point B; money on the back end to keep things standing (hopefully in time); and of course, money to distribute when our worst nightmares come to fruition.

I wonder about all of that, I do.

What are you wondering about?

Trump in Transition (v48)

Watching people argue on Twitter about which presidential candidate won more counties - not more votes, more counties - is both comical and disheartening.

The self-proclaimed "proud supporters of the Constitution" seem to believe that counties vote...? And, without irony, they also believe that counties - particularly counties in red states - cheat, make up ballots, and round up dead people to vote against Trump.

The same people believe that wearing a Black Lives Matter t-shirt when observing ballot-counting is both a crime against humanity and indicative of cheating, while wearing a MAGA hat is indicative of patriotism and truthfulness, which is itself untruthful, if the judges who've reviewed the 'evidence' from said 'red heads' are correct.

And, it would seem, many of them apparently think that a mythological Scandinavian sea monster is going to save the Trump presidency. That would appear to be a completely un-American approach, don't you think? An illegal immigrant from a country governed by a monarch swimming in to save the American republic? Stop it.

Donald Trump feeds off the people who idolize him and can't imagine that someone wouldn't; it's impossible for him to believe he is unlikeable. Even in the face of evidence that people dislike him, he denies the possibility.

To sit where he sits - he acts like he's in a booth in the back in the corner in the dark, except he's in the White House, and we can see him - and repeatedly tell us and the world that he won, that he got more votes than Obama!! and more votes than any sitting president ever!!!, and that there's no way anyone could have gotten more votes than him since he got more than anyone before him!!!!! is insane. It's delusional. It's narcissistic.

And, sadly, it's completely consistent with what we have been forced to put up with throughout his presidency. He has not transitioned an inch, not even a hair. He is now who he was then, who he has been and will be forever, except that he was elected president. Once.

He denies my existence, and the existence of millions of people like me, over 81 million of us, who did not vote for him. He denies the existence of people who had the audacity to like someone better, or to dislike his opponent less than they dislike him.

The millions who showed our displeasure, our distaste, our dislike, he cannot or will not comprehend. Our exhaustion, he cannot comprehend. How annoyed we are, how sick we are of his constant self-promoting, the embarrassing tweets, the grifting, the cast of characters by whom he is surrounded, that he foists upon us, that he honors and celebrates, he cannot comprehend.

Equally incomprehensible is that, as he pretends all of this isn't happening, didn't happen, isn't true, he continues to roil the waters in which his devout supporters swim, working them into a frenzy of martial-law supporting, havoc-wreaking, our-country-has-been-stolen fanatics. They are insisting he will be president, he will have his second-term inauguration come January 20th, and they don't care what it takes to make that happen.

• Let's send separate slates of Trump electors. Let's have a nationwide recount - in the states he lost this time that he won last time, because that is the nation, that handful of states. That is the height of the resistance against him, and against which devout rage must be directed.

• Let's have a separate inauguration for him, at noon on January 20, 2021, an online inauguration. It'll be the biggest crowd for any online inauguration in history, it surely will - the zoomiest Zoom call EVER! We'll bring Sean Spicer back, grab him from the studios of Newsmax and have him count all the little faces on the screens to validate the count! Obama never had a zoom inauguration this big - we'll show him, that Muslim race-baiting worst president ever- we'll SHOW HIM!

• Let's fight the acceptance of the Electoral College vote! Let's dispute it on the floor during the Joint Session, and make the Vice President deal with that! (Insert Howard Dean scream here.)

And Trump sits in our house, huddling with the China-loving fraudster Steve Bannon; with the indescribable Sidney Powell, the lawyer who's not his lawyer, but who spends an awful lot of time at the White House lately; with Rudy Giuliani, the lawyer who IS his lawyer but who spends a lot of time telling people that Sidney Powell is nuts; with twice-confessed lying pardoned disgraced General Michael Flynn, and his other usual suspects - RINOS one and all - because these folks are not representative of the majority of Republicans. They cannot be.

Trump and his followers would have you believe that Republicans in charge of elections in red states are RINOS for not declaring him the winner, but they are actually Republicans, sharing their disappointment at the outcome of the election (however misplaced that disappointment is, in my opinion) and at the same time supporting the rule of law and the processes that are in place.

They are being turned on (no, not like that), the Republicans are, by the man they chose, the one they said was a lunatic, unstable, a racist, not like them, not good for the country, a con man, and more. He is turning on them, not just privately, but pitting one against the other, pitting the many against the one, whoever the one is that is drawing Trump's ire at any particular moment.

The majority of Republicans don't have the cojones to put themselves in the Stevie-Rudy-Sidney-Mikey crowd, right? They prefer to cower in the face of these folks. Complicitly, most of them silently, but still cowering, instead of using their precious microphone and camera time talking about what their constituents need, regardless of what Trump wants, or heaven forbid, talking about what the country needs.

And they surely don't have the cojones to stand up to Trump, unless it's on their way out of office. That seems to be the time when courage, and cojones, are found aplenty. (Well, a couple, maybe; not really aplenty. I mean, they're not hanging like ornaments on a tree or anything.)

All of this - the ignorance, the insistence, the convincing, the convicted, the complicit, the true believers, the treasonous - all of this creates a giant, flaming bullseye showing us exactly where we are, and how far we need to go.

We don't need a cult leader, raking in money hand over fist from the faithful. We don't need a grifter, enriching his businesses and his family off the taxpayers. We don't need a liar, a tweeter, a shouter, a screamer, a cranky two-year-old having a temper tantrum.

We surely don't need more people coming to the White House wearing their criminal convictions on their sleeves; we need people who have the courage of their convictions, their principles, their ethics, their love of country.

We don't need a person, we need a plan, for the entire country.

The 'real' transition cannot happen soon enough.

TGIF 11/20/20

Wouldn't it be fun to blog like the woman in charge of the GAO tweets?  GSA Administrator Emily Murphy's now-deleted tweet from Wednesday (you can see it here) - the first one she had sent since the election - inspired me to compose the following very important and very confusing sentence.  

Had;j aow4ith pa984ty;;o gnz;dkfn.

Maybe someone good at creating codes could make it mean something - you know, like those tattoos on Jane Doe's body on Blindspot all had some deeper meaning awaiting discovery? 

In addition to that weird tweet, Administrator Murphy has gotten attention from members of the House, some of whom sent this request. They're looking for an "immediate briefing" on Murphy's "ongoing refusal" to give the Biden-Harris team the access - and funds - they're afforded under the President Transition Act. And, they're interested in some recent actions by the president, too. 

We also have questions about last-minute actions taken by the White House related to GSA leading up to the election. On September 2, 2020, president Trump issued an executive order modifying the-longstanding order of succession within GAS to place the General Counsel as fourth-in-line to perform the duties of Administrator after you, your Deputy, and your Chief of Staff. 

And then, less than a week before the election, Trump installed a new GSA General Counsel - imagine that! So, it would seem, there is no limit to the lengths to which he will go to interfere in, well, pretty much anything and everything. 

Speaking of interfering, it seems former Trump chief strategist Steve Bannon is again more interesting in his post-White House life than when he was there. This time, the FTC is interested in hearing from him regarding the Cambridge Analytica data breach from a while back. 

The Federal Trade Commission has asked a federal court to force former Trump campaign CEO Steve Bannon to testify under oath as part of the agency's investigation into Facebook's Cambridge Analytica data breach.

Seems they want to interview Bannon as part of a probe into whether he should be found personally liable for his involvement in the breach, for which Facebook was fined $5B and two of the firm's executives settled with the FTC

And, speaking of "only the best people," there's the president's 40th 4th press secretary, Kayleigh McEnany, who's made so many recent campaign appearances and 'personal' appearances on Fox News, I'm sort of shocked that she even remembered where the White House press briefing room is. But she did, and she was in full campaign mode today, seemingly trying to convince people that there wasn't an orderly transition of power in 2016. Which is a bald-faced lie, except that it can't be a lie, because she said she'd never lie. So now, I don't know what to think (OK, seriously - of course I know what to think, and you do too, right?)

Also, on the not knowing what to think front, I wonder why we're not :hearing from the folks who are always complaining about bail reform...I mean, Kyle Rittenhouse, who gave someone money to purchase what was described as an assault-style weapon, then got a ride from his home in Illinois to neighboring Wisconsin, where he used the gun to kill two and injure another man, has been released after posting a $2M cash bond.  Why is he out on bail? Why aren't people outraged by that? 

I'd put Bannon, McEnany, and Murphy on the bad week list, but Rittenhouse, with the help of the millions of dollars raised for his legal defense, definitely had a good week.

Also of note this week:

• Rudy Giuliani, who found the right place to hold his press conference, and then wilted under pressure (bad week);
• the president, who claimed (again) that he won the election, boasting of his 74 million votes; too bad he lost (bad week):
• Dolly Parton, who donated a million bucks to coronavirus efforts, and ended up helping to fund the Moderna/BioNtech vaccine (good week);
• BioNtech, the German company I've heard pronounced four or five different ways in the past several days. They've got a bit of an uphill battle on that front, I think (mixed week);
• SpaceX, and NASA, and especially the four astronauts who very smoothly went from earth to the International Space Station (great week); and
• Staff Sgt. Phillip Gray, who wrote 270 notes for his daughter - one for each day he'd be deployed - which his wife put in his daughter's lunchbox. (GREAT week!)

I hope it's easy for you to tell what kind of week you had.

TGIF, everyone.

Sidebar: TGIF 3/15/19

Yesterday's post was about hate, particularly white supremacist hate, which we tend to ignore much more than any other kind.

I wanted to point out a couple of things that are directly related both to yesterday's post, and to why this particular type of hate tends to be ignored.

First: I saw a couple of accounts (and you can watch here for yourself) about a request made by New Zealand's Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern to president Trump. Her recounting was that Trump asked what offer of support the US could provide, and she asked him for "sympathy and love for all Muslim communities."

Below are three tweets the president sent about the white supremacist terrorist attack in Christchurch:

In between the first and second tweets about the attack, he tweeted about the "Jexodus" - a new term for me. According to Trump that's what you call it when Jews leave the Democratic Party and join the Republican Party. I'm sure he learned that on Fox News.

Other tweets and retweets yesterday, if my count is correct, included one about Google helping China but not the US; one about the Paris Accord; one about the economy; one about the weather in the Midwest: eight about the Mueller probe; and ten about immigration and his veto of the bill opposing the national emergency declaration to re-appropriate money for the border wall.

At no point did he do what Prime Minister Ardern requested. 

But wait - there's more. Or, less, really.

Sunday School 6/17/18

Since it's Father's Day, I spent time in the classrooms where there was discussion on the issue of separating kids from their parents at the border. I managed to sit in on Meet the Press, Face the Nation, and This Week, where we'll start with white nationalist and former Trump chief strategist Steve Bannon.

Jonathan Karl was in the host's chair today, and asked Bannon how, amidst all the criticism from both the left and the right, the separation policy can be justified.

I don't think you have to justify it. We have a crisis on the southern border. But the elites in this city - and this ties into Korea, ties into everything that took place this week - the elites, the permanent political class in this city want to manage situations to, you know, to bad outcomes.  And Donald Trump is not going to do that. He's just not going to kick the can down the road...

We ran on a policy, very simply, stop mass illegal immigration and limit legal immigration, get our sovereignty back, and to help our workers, OK? And so he went to a zero tolerance policy...

Bannon went on to make a completely misguided point about some other immigrants, completely unrelated to the issue at hand.

And by the way, I don't see the mainstream media, and I don't see the liberal left embracing the Angel Moms, those people that were permanently separate from their children because of illegal aliens that came over here and committed crimes and killed people. 

You know, the way the Republicans do. After attacking the pope, Catholics in general (he is one, he said) and saying that no way should DACA recipients ever get citizenship, he chiefly offered his immigration strategy.

I strongly recommend that we just wait until 2019, right, to address this, because I think we're going to have a big November... I would definitely shut down the government over the wall, absolutely... So yes, I would say on - in September, if they have not allocated money for the wall, let's shut down the government, and by the way on November 6, let the voters decide.

 Had enough?  Well, maybe not so fast.

Let's take a listen as Kellyanne Conway chats with Chuck Todd on MTP. Todd asked if the president was ready to pick up the phone and stop the separations,which Lindsey Graham said he could do.

The president is ready to get meaningful immigration reform across the board. And Chuck, let me tell just tell you, nobody likes seeing babies ripped from their mothers' arms, from their mother's wombs, frankly. But we have to make sure that DHS's laws are understood through the soundbite culture that we live in...

Like Bannon, she made an invalid connection, in her case to say that prior administrations have also struggled with this.

Secretary of DHS under President Obama told the New York Times this weekend that this was the bane of his existence for three years. He was describing the fact that they had to detain families in these large facilities for very long periods of time. Why? Because in the summer of 2014 we saw the surge, particularly from Central America, tens of thousands, if not more, unaccompanied minors coming to the border and trying to gain entry.

Which begs the question, if they were unaccompanied minors, from whose arms were they being ripped?  Anyway - she went on to echo the administration's argument, that we're treating these illegals the same way we treat citizens who are convicted of a crime and sentenced to jail (after arraignment, a bail hearing, a trial, a determination of guilt, and sentencing).  

And then she blamed the Democrats for not having ESP.

Chuck, I don't remember a single Democrat, I could be mistaken, maybe one murmured it, but in the one hour meeting back in January in the cabinet room where the president invited senators and congressmen from the Republican and Democratic parties to the cabinet room... Did the issue come up? The Democrats only want to talk about DACA, the Dreamers. Why weren't they talking about this?

To his credit Todd pointed out that the separation policy was issued in April, which on most calendars is after January.

What they should have said is, "Look, we had a surge over the border in 2014, Mr. president, under President Obama, and it shocked everyone, and we simply didn't have the capacity. We want to avoid that in the future and work with you." 

And, she added,

...if the Democrats are serious, and if a lot of Republicans are serious, they'll come together. The won't just talk about this week, 'the Dreamers,' or just 'the wall,' or just 'catch and release.' It's all of the above.

And insisting on that, of course, is what's been preventing comprehensive immigration reform for decades. 

Finally we hear from Maine's Republican Senator Susan Collins, whose interview was aired on CBS' Face the Nation. Her conversation with Margaret Brennan included her disagreement with the separation policy.

I do not (agree with it). Senator Jeff Flake and I have written tot he administration to ask for more information about the policy, but we already know two things. First, from the experience of previous administrations it does not act as a deterrent to use children in this fashion. And second, and much more important, it is inconsistent with our American values to separate these children from their parents unless there's evidence of abuse or another very good reason.

Collins is not a softy on immigration - not at all. She called out the administration for saying they would not separate children from their asylum-seeking parents, but that is what's happening. As she pointed out,

What the administration has decided to do is to separate children from their parents to try and send a message that if you cross the border with children, your children are going to be ripped away from you. That's traumatizing to the children who are innocent victims and it's contrary to our values in this country.

That's not to say we shouldn't act to try to curb illegal immigration. We should, and I support the president's proposals for border security. We do need to strengthen our security at the border. We need to work with those countries in Central American from which these families are coming to end the gang violence that is encouraging them to leave. And in some cases we need to repatriate the whole family back to the home country. 

But we know from years of experience that we need to fix our immigration laws and that using children is not the answer. 

We'll leave it there for this week. See you around campus. 

Oh Please! Oh Please!

Oh please, let there be a Trump National Golf Course within sight of one of the lease areas the Interior Department wants to open up for drilling, oh please!

Today, we learned from Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke that

Responsibly developing our energy resources on the Outer Continental Shelf in a safe and well-regulated way is important to our economy and energy security, and it provides billions of dollars to fund the conservation of our coastlines, public lands, and parks. 

Today's announcement lays out the options that are on the table and starts a lengthy and robust public comment period. Just like with mining, not all areas are appropriate for offshore drilling, and we will take that into consideration in the coming weeks. 

We all know how much a fan of energy production this president is -- he literally drips energy, 'all of the above' energy, without playing favorites or picking winners and losers, remember? Except when it comes to his own properties, well, all bets are off.

In this post from last April, I noted that when Trump found out there might be wind turbines off the coast of his Aberdeenshire golf course, he sent 16 letters to government officials, noting how damaging it would be for the country of Scotland.

Don't destroy your coastline and your countryside with these monstrous turbines. Your economy will become a third world wasteland that global investors will avoid. 

And, there was this -

Its adverse visual impact on my development and the beautiful Aberdeen coastline will be disastrous and environmentally irresponsible.  

Now, I don't know about you, but if the president got that bent out of shape about a dozen wind turbines in Scotland, can you imagine how he'd feel about oil rigs within sight of one of his American resorts? It doesn't even have to be all that close, just close enough to get a glimpse of off in the horizon...you know, the deep water horizon.

Or, even better, maybe we could put one off the coast of his pride and joy, Mar-a-Lago?

Wouldn't that be too, too perfectly ironic?

Drillbabydrill! Unleash our energy independence, right in front of the president's private club!

On another note, oh please, oh please let there be tape recordings of the interviews that went into Fire and Fury, the explosive new book about the Trump White House!

I don't really care that the GOP is experiencing a collective um, er, a collective 'happy moment' about the downfall of Steve Bannon, or whether he's the bigger believer in the Trump agenda than the GOP  leadership is (because of course, he is) and I don't even care that a really rich Republican donor like Rebekah Mercer has to publicly release a statement disavowing Bannon. That's a real first world problem right there, don't you think?

No, what I care about is wanting to know the truth about the Trump administration.

If it's as unhinged as people have been saying all along, as disjointed as the media has been reporting all along, we deserve to know.

If there are tapes, interview notes, and all of the other tricks of the journalism trade to support what's in the book, then we will know who's lying, finally, and we'll know what kind of shape the country might really be in with Trump in the Oval Office.

It doesn't mean that we'd be any better off, immediately - it will only mean that we would know, and wouldn't have to guess any more. And then, if needed, appropriate steps could be taken.  If, on the other hand, there's proof that what Michael Wolff has in his book is NOT true, then we will know that, too.

Oh please, oh please!

Wondering on Wednesday (v116)

Oh MY, what a Wednesday for wondering! Let's get to it!

Why, I wonder, have we (and by 'we' I mean everyone I know and most of the anchors on TV and radio) never heard of a 'bomb cyclone' before?  What a cool term for a really messed up situation, right? Here's how one writer at Popular Science talked about it:

Bomb cyclone: it sounds really cool, it's actually kind of scary, and it's headed your way. On Wednesday and Thursday, the intimidatingly-named winter storm is set to hit the East Coast with icy precipitation from Florida up into New England. But a name as apocalyptic as bomb cyclone begs explanation. How bad will this storm be, exactly? I mean, "bomb" is generally a qualifier you want attached to something like "frostings," not "cyclone."

Hear, hear. Apparently it has to do with low pressure falling a whole lot in a 24 hour period, and cold air, and circular winds or stuff. To be honest, they had me at "frostings." And, by the way, the storm's name is Grayson.

Or, maybe the storm's name is Bannon, I'm not sure. Seems the former special friend to the president, the guy who helped him win, yadda yadda yadda, was really just a nothingburger after all this time. ICYMI, Bannon has turned on the president, it seems. Or maybe he's trying to save him, I don't know.  In a new book coming out next week, Bannon had this to say about that pivotal meeting in June 2016 with some Russians (just one of many of his contributions to the book):

The three senior guys in the campaign thought it was a good idea to meet with a foreign government inside Trump Tower in the conference room on the 25th floor with no lawyers. Even if you thought that this was not treasonous, or unpatriotic, or bad shit, and I happen to think it's all of that, you should have called the FBI immediately.

But we certainly don't need to wonder how the president feels about him now, do we?

Steve Bannon has nothing to do with me or my presidency. When he was fired, he not only lost his job, he lost his mind. Steve was a staffer who worked for me, after I had already won the nomination by defeating seventeen candidates, often described as the most talented field ever assembled in the Republican party. 

Now that he is on his own, Steve is learning that winning isn't as easy as I made it look. Steve had very little to do with our historic victory, which was delivered by the forgotten men and women of this country... 

It goes on in a similar vein, and it seems pretty clear it wasn't written by the president, but rather by his handlers. Who knows, maybe it was written by Anthony Scaramucci, he says he's still close to the president. And who am I to wonder about that?

There one other thing we will be left to wonder about, maybe for ever - or maybe, not at all. For it seems that the White House has shut down its vaunted Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity. You remember what the president told us when the group met for the first time, don't you?

No? That's OK - here's an excerpt:

I'm pleased that more than 30 states have already agreed to share the information with the commission and the other states...If any state does not want to share this information, one has to wonder what they're worried about. And I asked the Vice President, I asked the commission: What are they worried about? There's something There always is.

This issue is very important to me because, throughout the campaign and even after it, people would come up to me and express their concerns about voter inconsistencies and irregularities, which they saw.. In some cases, having to do with very large numbers of people in certain states.... if we want to Make America Great Again, we have to protect the integrity of the vote and our voters.

Alas, Sarah Sanders told us,

Rather than engage in endless legal battles at taxpayer expense, today president Donald J. Trump signed an executive order to dissolve the Commission, and he has asked the Department of Homeland Security to review its initial findings and determine next courses of action.

We are reminded, in the same article linked above that a Loyola Law School study found 31 known cases of impersonation fraud, out of a billion votes cast, in all American elections from 2000 - 2014, so maybe the Commission was just a way for Trump to prove his own tale of 3,000,000 illegals voted against him?  And, I wonder who those 31 folks were, anyway? And who they voted for?

And finally, tonight marked the premiere of season 11 of The X-Files.  As they say on the show, "the truth is out there."

I wonder...

TGIF 9/29/17

Earlier this week, president Trump lost his first election since being elected last fall. And he lost his patience with just about everyone, it seems.

You'll remember, 'he' was successful in winning all of the replacement elections for the folks who left Congress to become cabinet members; the results of those elections I think were as much attributable to  Democrats struggling to get a message out vs. just throwing dollars from all around the country at the different races.

Over the past several weeks he had been running a full-bore Twitter campaign, and even held a rally in Alabama in support of Big Luther Strange, the 'loyal' candidate in the race against Constitution disregarder Judge Roy Moore.  Moore, with the support of Trump's former Chief Strategist Steve Bannon, took the primary race.

The outcome for Trump? He started deleting his Big Luther tweets, although he may or may not have time to get all of them taken care of between his "we're doing great in Puerto Rico" messaging and his yelling at his cabinet members and his stumping for his once-in-a-lifetime tax reform for the rich program and threatening #NoKo with war and whatnot.  (In case you're wondering, here's some analysis on the legality of him deleting his tweets).

The outcome for Bannon? Tossed from the White House, reinvigorated at the helm of Breitbart news, and boldly defying his former boss. And oh -- attacking any candidate that has the support of Mitch McConnell (Strange had that, you see), even if it means going on the air against Trump to tell people the best candidate for Trump's agenda. Which, of course, is fascinating -- the guy who has the agenda doesn't even know who best will support it?  Or maybe the better question is, which agenda are we supporting, anyway?

Arizona Senator John McCain confirmed earlier this week his doctors say his prognosis is poor, which is not stopping McCain from doing his job in the Senate, nor is it stopping the president from continuing to bash him for his 'no' vote on the last best hope to make a mess of the Affordable Care Act while not repealing and replacing it.  Trump tweeted a montage of McCain saying the ACA needed to be r-and-r'd. And, according to Axios, Trump is physically mocking McCain's thumbs down vote in July.  Which simply can't be true, since he has never and would never mock anyone who has a disability, or, you now, serious injuries incurred as a POW.

One final note:  a while back, I expressed my dismay that SCOTUS Justice Neil Gorsuch was going to be giving a speech - at Trump's Washington DC hotel - a few days before the start of the 2017-2018 court season. The speech, which was given yesterday at a luncheon for the Fund for American Studies, was met with a few dozen protesters trying valiantly to create the 'din of democracy' that Gorsuch mentioned. He also included this comment:

To be worthy of our First Amendment freedoms we have to all adopt certain civil habits that enable others to enjoy them as well.

Civility? That thing we're seeing none of from the White House these days?

The hotel, of course, is the subject of a number of lawsuits, many pointing at the Emoluments Clause forbidding a president from accepting foreign 'gifts' - and it's possible that these cases will end up before the Supremes at some point...along with all of the other Trump related cases that might be end up there... which is why I was not thrilled with Gorsuch participating in the speech there in the first place.

On the plus side? The president will be relentless in expressing his displeasure with "his" Supreme Court Justice should Gorsuch rule against him at any time -- so I'll hold out hope for that.

In the meantime, TGIF.

Trump Charlottesville Take 3

The more he speaks, the more I cringe. Trump let his freak flag fly at a press conference today, addressing again the murder in Charlottesville of Heather Heyer, who died when a white supremacist apparently purposefully gunned his car into the back of a group of people.

Want some examples? Here's why it took 48 hours to get his second statement out. 

I wanted to make sure — unlike most politicians, that what I said was correct. Not make a quick statement. The statement I made on Saturday, the first statement, was a fine statement. But you don't make statements that direct unless you know the facts. It takes a little while to get the facts. You still don't know the facts, and it's a very, very important process to me, and it's a very important statement, so I don't want to go quickly and just make a statement for the sake of making a political statement. I want to know the facts. If you go back to — I brought it. I brought it. I brought it. As I said — remember this, Saturday — we condemn in the strongest possible terms this egregious display of hatred, bigotry and violence. It has no place in America, and then I went on from there. Now, here's the thing. Excuse me, excuse me. Take it nice and easy. Here's the thing. When I make a statement, I like to be correct. I want the facts. This event just happened. In fact, a lot of the event didn't even happen yet, as we were speaking. This event just happened. Before I make a statement, I need the facts, so I don't want to rush into a statement.

So, making the statement when I made it was excellent. In fact, the young woman, who I hear is a fantastic young woman — and it was on NBC — her mother wrote me and said — through I guess Twitter, social media — the nicest things, and I very much appreciated that. I hear she was a fine, really actually an incredible young woman. But her mother on Twitter thanked me for what I said. And honestly, if the press were not fake and if it was honest, the press would have said what I said was very nice. But unlike you and unlike — excuse me — unlike you and unlike the media, before I make a statement I like to know the facts.

Um... I don't even know where to start. Maybe birtherism? I'm pretty sure you still owe us the 'facts' on that one.  And the young woman who you hear is a fantastic young woman, a fine, really actually an incredible young woman? Her name is Heather Heyer. Say her name. Pick up the phone, have a conversation with her mother. 

Here's another, on whether the CEO of WalMart was correct that a critical opportunity was missed in helping bring the country together. 

Not at all. I think the country — look, you take a look. I've created over a million jobs since I'm president. The country is booming, the stock market is setting records. We have the highest employment numbers we've ever had in the history of our country. We're doing record business. We have the highest levels of enthusiasm. So, the head of WalMart, whom I know, who is a very nice guy, was making a political statement. I mean, I do it the same way. You know why? Because I want to make sure, when I make a statement that the statement is correct, and there was no way — there was no way of making a correct statement that early. I had to see the facts, unlike a lot of reporters — unlike a lot of reporters. I know, David Duke was there. I wanted to see the facts, and the facts as they started coming out were very well-stated. In fact, everybody said his statement was beautiful. If he would have made it sooner, that would have been good. I couldn't have made it sooner because I didn't know all of the facts. Frankly, people still don't know all of the facts. It was very important — excuse me, excuse me. It was very important to me to get the facts out and correctly, because if I would have made a fast statement — and the first statement was made without knowing much other than what we were seeing. The second statement was made with knowledge, with great knowledge. There's still things — excuse me, there's still things that people don't know. I want to make a statement with knowledge. I wanted to know the facts. Okay.

No, no, no, no -- seriously: you were asked if you missed a critical opportunity to bring the country together, and THAT was your answer? #WhatTheEverlovingSniff

How about throwing Steve Bannon under the bus, are you willing to do that? Sorry, that was the answer, not the question - the question was "do you still have confidence in Steve?"

Well, we'll see. Look, I like Mr. Bannon, he's a friend of mine, but Mr. Bannon came on very late — you know that. I went through 17 senators, governors and I won all the primaries. Mr. Bannon came on very much later than that, and I like him, he's a good man. He is not a racist, I can tell you that. He's a good person, he actually gets a very unfair press in that regard. But we'll see what happens with Mr. Bannon, but he's a good person and I think the press treats him frankly very unfairly.

Hey Steve, get Reince on the phone, maybe he can pick you up and give you a ride home? Unless, I drag you on a junket with me and kick you out of the big boy car like I did to him, that was fun.

Is the president concerned about race relations, are they better or worse since he took office? 

I think they have gotten better- or the same- I- look. They've been frayed for a long time, and you can ask President Obama about that because he'd make speeches about it. But, I believe that the fact that I brought in, it will be soon, millions of jobs — you see where companies are moving back into our country — I think that's going to have a tremendous positive impact on race relations. We have companies coming back into our country, we have two car companies that just announced, we have FoxConn in Wisconsin just announced. We have many companies, I say pouring back into the country. I think that's going to have a huge, positive impact on race relations. You know why? It's jobs. What people want now, they want jobs. They want great jobs with good pay and, when they have that, you watch how race relations will be. 

I gotta tell you, I think people marching around giving Nazi salutes don't really give a good goddamn about jobs. Unless "Jew will not replace me" means "I can't wait to go work in a coal mine."

How about reaching out to Heather Heyer's family, have you done that yet?

No, I'll be reaching out. I'll be reaching out. 

When will you be reaching out?

I was very — I thought that the statement put out, the mother's statement, I thought was a beautiful statement. I must tell you, I was- it was something that I really appreciated. I thought it was terrific, and really under the- under the kind of stress that she's under and the heartache that she's under, I thought putting out that statement to me was really something I won't forget. Thank you all very much. Thank you. Thank you.

One more. When asked if he was going to go to Charlottesville, not for a golfing vacation or anything like that, but you know, to help heal the wounds and presidential stuff. 

I own a house in Charlottesville. Does anyone know I own a house in Charlottesville?  (Reporter: Where is it?)

Oh, boy, it's going to be- it's in Charlottesville, you'll see. (Reporter: Is it in the winery or something?)

It's a- it is the winery.

I mean, I know a lot about Charlottesville. Charlottesville is a great place that's been very badly hurt over the last couple of days. I own- I own actually one of the largest wineries in the United States that's in Charlottesville.

Before you make a statement, you need to know the facts. You would not want to make a statement without knowing the facts. You still don't know the facts, and it's a very important process to me.